Essentials of Sepsis Management
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Essentials of Sepsis Management John M. Green, MD KEYWORDS Sepsis Sepsis syndrome Surgical infection Septic shock Goal-directed therapy KEY POINTS Successful treatment of perioperative sepsis relies on the early recognition, diagnosis, and aggressive treatment of the underlying infection; delay in resuscitation, source control, or antimicrobial therapy can lead to increased morbidity and mortality. When sepsis is suspected, appropriate cultures should be obtained immediately so that antimicrobial therapy is not delayed; initiation of diagnostic tests, resuscitative measures, and therapeutic interventions should otherwise occur concomitantly to ensure the best outcome. Early, aggressive, invasive monitoring is appropriate to ensure adequate resuscitation and to observe the response to therapy. Any patient suspected of having sepsis should be in a location where adequate resources can be provided. INTRODUCTION Sepsis is among the most common conditions encountered in critical care, and septic shock is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in the intensive care unit (ICU). Indeed, sepsis is among the 10 most common causes of death in the United States.1 Martin and colleagues2 showed that surgical patients account for nearly one-third of sepsis cases in the United States. Despite advanced knowledge in the field, sepsis remains a common threat to life in the perioperative period. Survival relies on early recognition and timely targeted correction of the syndrome’s root cause as well as ongoing organ support. The objective of this article is to review strategies for detection and timely management of sepsis in the perioperative surgical patient. A comprehensive review of the molecular and cellular mechanisms of organ dysfunc- tion and sepsis management is beyond the scope of this article. The information pre- sented herein is divided into sections devoted to definitions and diagnosis, source The author has nothing to disclose. Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, 1000 Blythe Boulevard, Suite 601, Charlotte, NC 28203, USA E-mail address: [email protected] Surg Clin N Am 95 (2015) 355–365 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.suc.2014.10.006 surgical.theclinics.com 0039-6109/15/$ – see front matter Ó 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. 356 Green control, fluid therapy, antibiotic therapy, and organ support for clarity of discussion, but the practitioner should understand that these approaches occur simultaneously at the bedside, and each action is related to, and should act in concert with, the others. DEFINITION AND DIAGNOSIS The most important aspect of intervention in sepsis is early recognition of the signs and symptoms of the condition. Reducing time to diagnosis and initiation of therapy for severe sepsis is considered a critical component of mortality reduction.3 The Society of Critical Care Medicine and the American College of Chest Physicians proposed standard definitions of this illness spectrum in a consensus published in 1992. The systemic inflammatory response syndrome describes an immune response consisting of 2 or more of the following: Temperature greater than 38C or less than 35C Heart rate greater than 90 beats per minute Respiratory rate higher than 20 breaths per minute or a PaCO2 below 32 mm Hg Leukocytosis of 12,000/mm3 or less than 4000/mm3 This inflammatory reaction in the presence of infection is known as sepsis. Compli- cations of organ failure and hypotension constitute severe sepsis. Finally, septic shock is defined by severe sepsis accompanied by hypoperfusion and organ failure refrac- tory to fluid resuscitation.4 As with all clinical maladies, a focused history and physical examination can provide vital information about potential risk factors for infection and the most likely site of origin. Several clinical clues may support the clinician’s suspicion of infection. For example, unexplained tachycardia is frequently the first indicator of inadequate organ perfusion or a hyperdynamic state of inflammation and should be thoroughly investi- gated in a perioperative patient. Septic patients, unlike those in cardiac failure or hemorrhagic shock, frequently have warm skin on examination because their periph- eral vasculature is not constricted. Acute glucose elevation can be a predictor of infec- tion and should raise the provider’s suspicion when present.5 Inadequate urine output, while useful in monitoring volume and perfusion status, is a late finding in sepsis and septic shock. Sepsis in the surgical patient is likely an underappreciated cause of morbidity and mortality in the perioperative period. In the postoperative period beyond 24 hours, sepsis is by far the most common cause of shock. Sources include surgical site infec- tions, catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI), pneumonia, and urinary tract infections. Moore and colleagues6 found that the abdomen was the most common site of infection in their general surgery ICU population, accounting for 63% of cases, followed by the lungs (17%), wound/soft tissue (10%), urinary tract (7%), and all other sites (4%). In fact, the authors demonstrated that the incidence of sepsis and septic shock exceeded those of pulmonary embolism and myocardial infarction by 10-fold. Gram-negative species were the most prevalent culprits, particularly in abdominal sources of sepsis.6 An understanding of the patient’s recent clinical trajec- tory is invaluable, particularly in the perioperative period. Host defense mechanisms can be compromised by many factors, including surgery, implanted devices, or previ- ous antibiotic use. Knowledge of the patient’s surgical history can give clues to mental status changes, increased minute ventilation, decreased urine output, glucose intoler- ance, thrombocytopenia, or gastrointestinal failure. Appropriate cultures should be obtained before initiating antimicrobial therapy, provided the antimicrobials are not delayed. These cultures should include one set Essentials of Sepsis Management 357 of blood cultures drawn from any indwelling device, and a separate set drawn periph- erally. If the site of origin is not clear, prompt imaging studies should be performed, as required, to investigate suspected sources of infection, and any potential source should be sampled. Any patient suspected of being in septic shock should be immediately moved to the ICU and administered antibiotics within 1 hour. Septic shock, a result of infection and the attendant inflammatory response, is composed of metabolic derangements attrib- utable to inadequate perfusion, resulting in the buildup of lactic acid and the disruption of normal cellular function. However, the other significant challenge of the shock syndrome consists of the organism’s neuroendocrine responses aimed at restoring adequate perfusion. One of these responses, glucose dysregulation, is a common clue to the presence of an infectious source. One prospective study of 2200 trauma patients admitted to the ICU revealed a 91% positive predictive value of acute glucose elevation in the diagnosis of infection.5 This stress-induced hyperglycemia is generally seen as a transient plasma glucose level greater than 200 mg/dL and is thought to occur following increases in cortisol, glucagon, and epinephrine. Acute glucose eleva- tion should stimulate clinicians to search for a new source of infection. When septic shock is diagnosed, fluid bolus should be given, unless there is indis- putable evidence of acute left heart failure. Electrocardiogram tracing should be obtained immediately to determine the likelihood of cardiac dysfunction. Arterial blood gas should be measured, as pH will drop below neutral due to anaerobic metabolism and lactic acid accumulation, if a shock state exists. After the syndrome is recognized and resuscitation is begun, a review of the patient’s medical history is paramount to determine causation. Surgical sites must be quickly examined for erythema, drainage, bullous changes, or other signs of infec- tion. Surgeons and those caring for surgical patients should have specific knowledge of any operative procedure a patient has undergone, because this will surely help them focus on possible causes for sepsis and septic shock. If sepsis occurs in the first 24 hours after surgery, surgical site infection should be entertained. A streptococcal wound infection can quickly progress to myofascial necrosis. If this is present, radical debridement in the operating room is mandatory, supported by antibiotic therapy. SOURCE CONTROL A specific, treatable source of sepsis should always be aggressively sought and addressed as rapidly as possible. Specifically, abscess drainage, wound exploration, debridement of necrotic tissue, removal of infected implanted device, or surgical control of infectious source should occur simultaneously with resuscitation and anti- biotic administration. An identified source should always be sampled and cultured for targeted therapy. A rare exception for surgical intervention exists with pancreatic necrosis, in which delayed surgical intervention has been shown to produce better outcomes.7 Without adequate source control, resuscitative efforts will not be success- ful. Definitive operation in the case of abdominal sepsis is not as important as limiting the ongoing physiologic insult. A damage-control approach is appropriate for septic shock from abdominal sources using the same principles as the damage-control approach to trauma care.8 FLUID THERAPY AND HEMODYNAMIC SUPPORT The ultimate goal of any hemodynamic